Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Max Power said:

I don't think the extent of the fraud has been revealed yet. Unknown at this point. 

Sigh, I'll bite.

What kind of fraud do you think happened?

And, why commit fraud and actually lose the chance for the Senate and lose seats in the House?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 33.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • knowledge dropper

    2548

  • timschochet

    1869

  • SaintsInDome2006

    1688

  • The General

    1673

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

For anyone who has ever wondered how authoritarians manage to take power in "modern" democracies, here's your first hand evidence that the USA is not immune. Thankfully it appears that the system is h

Following in the footsteps of Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, Friendster, and Google Plus, the Footballguys Forum hereby suspends President Trump's posting privileges. The suspension takes effect immediat

Are we sure it isn't Alamo Landscaping?

1 hour ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

No.  Did you believe all the waste on Russia was going to overturn an election?

I didn’t. I believed, and continue to believe, that Donald Trump committed impeachable acts for which he should have been removed from office. But had that happened, Mike Pence would have become President, so the election would not have been overturned. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, gianmarco said:

And, why commit fraud and actually lose the chance for the Senate and lose seats in the House?

This is the one I wonder about.  Literally no one has been able to explain this, and to date, I haven't seen anyone claiming fraud (or "smoke") even acknowledge the question.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Max Power said:

That fraud likely occurred and helped one candidate a lot more.

Max- I asked this a few days ago in another thread and no one answered.  I’d appreciate your thoughts on it. Thanks. 
 

Why is it automatically assumed that if voter fraud is happening it’s exclusively or majority on the Biden side?  Serious Trump supporters are as passionate in their love and support for Trump as I’ve seen in my lifetime, why is it unthinkable they wouldn’t cheat to keep him in office?   

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

This is the one I wonder about.  Literally no one has been able to explain this, and to date, I haven't seen anyone claiming fraud (or "smoke") even acknowledge the question.

It’s one of the central problems with every large conspiracy theory. When you start closely examining the results of any supposed plan, you usually discover that they’re far too inconsistent to make sense. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dkp993 said:

Max- I asked this a few days ago in another thread and no one answered.  I’d appreciate your thoughts on it. Thanks. 
 

Why is it automatically assumed that if voter fraud is happening it’s exclusively or majority on the Biden side?  Serious Trump supporters are as passionate in their love and support for Trump as I’ve seen in my lifetime, why is it unthinkable they wouldn’t cheat to keep him in office?   

Because that’s what delusional Trump says and many of his supporters follow his lead. By Trumps “rationale”, Florida was rigged in favor of Trump.  But you have some followers who will hang onto every word of his.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But whatever- he can waste his time And money with the litigations and will end up looking like a bigger fool in the end.  There will still be a small minority who will think it was rigged even after the investigation and that’s fine.  They can live their lives in misery if they want.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, timschochet said:
10 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

This is the one I wonder about.  Literally no one has been able to explain this, and to date, I haven't seen anyone claiming fraud (or "smoke") even acknowledge the question.

It’s one of the central problems with every large conspiracy theory. When you start closely examining the results of any supposed plan, you usually discover that they’re far too inconsistent to make sense. 

The biggest issue is that for such a conspiracy of fraud against Candidate X to succeed, you need A LOT of Candidate X partisans to be involved (chiefly, as see-no-evil ballot observers). Even in a super-close swing state, a handful of bad actors ain't gettin' it done.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Doug B said:

The biggest issue is that for such a conspiracy of fraud against Candidate X to succeed, you need A LOT of Candidate X partisans to be involved (chiefly, as see-no-evil ballot observers). Even in a super-close swing state, a handful of bad actors ain't gettin' it done.

In some cases in states with Republican governors, state assemblies, and secretary of state. Not plausible.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Max- I asked this a few days ago in another thread and no one answered.  I’d appreciate your thoughts on it. Thanks. 
 

Why is it automatically assumed that if voter fraud is happening it’s exclusively or majority on the Biden side?  Serious Trump supporters are as passionate in their love and support for Trump as I’ve seen in my lifetime, why is it unthinkable they wouldn’t cheat to keep him in office?   

The Republicans very well could have. I'm open to hearing those claims.

I think the 3am massive dump of Biden votes was suspect and worth looking in to.

 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Max Power said:

The Republicans very well could have. I'm open to hearing those claims.

I think the 3am massive dump of Biden votes was suspect and worth looking in to.

 

I’m all about looking into anything as well. But help me understand why that specifically was suspect. Was it the time? Was it the amount of positive Biden votes?   If that dump had happened at 7 PM would there still been a concern? Are you as concerned about other major blocks of votes for Trump in other states?   

I guess what I’m getting at is I just don’t understand, other than fear and partisanship, this voter fraud thing that comes up year after year.  There’s never been, in recent times, proven widespread voter fraud from either side.  Ever.  Countless committees partisan and bipartisan alike have looked deep into it and never found anything of consequence.   

Edited by dkp993
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sneegor said:

The civil war and rioting that will take place when Trump us declared the winner will be very scary.  Stock up on supplies now.

If you're going to post extreme things like this, back them up with a lot more detail in why you think that. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

I’m all about looking into anything as well. But help me understand why that specifically was suspect. Was it the time? Was it the amount of positive Biden votes?   If that dump had happened at 7 PM would there still been a concern? Are you as concerned about other major blocks of votes for Trump in other states?   

I guess what I’m getting at is I just don’t understand, other than fear and partisanship, this voter fraud thing that comes up year after year.  There’s never been, in recent times, proven widespread voter fraud from either side.  Ever.  Countless committees partisan and bipartisan alike have looked deep into it and never found anything of consequence.   

https://twitter.com/AndySwan/status/1323990699017228288?s=20

You don't think this 4am spike is an anomaly worth looking into? 

I'm not going to argue with people who think Biden won, but election integrity needs to be maintained. The whistleblowers should be heard and if it all amounts to minimal fraud, so be it. We can still get better. 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sydney Powell made an extreme claim of voter fraud and referenced the system and program used. She said there is evidence and it seems to be an easy claim to confirm or deny. I'll hold out hope it could swing an election, but like I said, if not, it's worth looking into. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Max Power said:

https://twitter.com/AndySwan/status/1323990699017228288?s=20

You don't think this 4am spike is an anomaly worth looking into? 

I'm not going to argue with people who think Biden won, but election integrity needs to be maintained. The whistleblowers should be heard and if it all amounts to minimal fraud, so be it. We can still get better. 

The Russian truthers loved whistleblowers. I’m guessing not so much now. 

Edited by HellToupee
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Max Power said:

https://twitter.com/AndySwan/status/1323990699017228288?s=20

You don't think this 4am spike is an anomaly worth looking into? 

I'm not going to argue with people who think Biden won, but election integrity needs to be maintained. The whistleblowers should be heard and if it all amounts to minimal fraud, so be it. We can still get better. 

My first sentence of the post you responded too “I’m all about looking into anything as well”, so no I have no issue with things being looked into.   I’m just not assuming there widespread fraud as it’s never been found before so why would I.  I’m taking the innocent until proven guilty position on this one   

I 100% agree with your election integrity statement.  I was wondering what you thought was fishy, apparently it’s the time.  Thanks.  I personally don’t think the time is concerning, doesn’t really mean much honestly, but if they want to investigate it to ensure its accuracy? All aboard.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dkp993 said:

My first sentence of the post you responded too “I’m all about looking into anything as well”, so no I have no issue with things being looked into.   I’m just not assuming there widespread fraud as it’s never been found before so why would I.  I’m taking the innocent until proven guilty position on this one   

I 100% agree with your election integrity statement.  I was wondering what you thought was fishy, apparently it’s the time.  Thanks.  I personally don’t think the time is concerning, doesn’t really mean much honestly, but if they want to investigate it to ensure its accuracy? All aboard.  

It's not as much the time as it was that dump was 96-100% Biden votes depending on the source which is a statistical improbability.

Also 89% of Wisconsin voters voted. Another statistical improbability. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't following extensively this week.  Where are we getting this info and stats that a 98% Biden dump of votes happened? How many votes were in that dump total, and what were they from? 

Likewise, Wi and the 90% of voters.  What is it usually? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Max Power said:

It's not as much the time as it was that dump was 96-100% Biden votes depending on the source which is a statistical improbability.

Also 89% of Wisconsin voters voted. Another statistical improbability. 

Thanks. And worth looking into I agree. Do you agree then we should look at other areas in other states where a huge blocks of votes were pro-Trump?  Other “statistical improbabilities”?   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dkp993 said:

Thanks. And worth looking into I agree. Do you agree then we should look at other areas in other states where a huge blocks of votes were pro-Trump?  Other “statistical improbabilities”?   

Of course. I'm all for a national audit. If a large portion of the population can't have faith in our process it's only a matter of time until it falls off the rails. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

I wasn't following extensively this week.  Where are we getting this info and stats that a 98% Biden dump of votes happened? How many votes were in that dump total, and what were they from? 

Likewise, Wi and the 90% of voters.  What is it usually? 

Sneegor's link above has some more on it, but in short...

Statistical Impossibilities in Wisconsin and Michigan: 

In both Michigan and Wisconsin, several vote dumps occurred at approximately 4am on Wednesday morning, which showed that Joe Biden received almost 100 percent of the votes. President Trump was leading by hundreds of thousands of votes in both states as America went to sleep, and turnout in the state of Wisconsin seems to be particularly impossible.

The voter turnout in Wisconsin apparently annihilated the historical record of 66.8% by almost 30 percentage points.

Statistical analysts have noted that this 5-point deviation was not only a statistical improbability, but a virtual statistical impossibility.

The odds of this occurring are 0.00000189% or 1 in 52,910,052.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Sneegor said:

 

Quote

Max Power said:

Sneegor's link above has some more on it ...


Theredelephants.com link Sneegor posted is inaccurate regarding Wisconsin voter turnout:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/05/fact-check-wisconsin-voter-turnout-line-past-elections/6176028002/

Quote

 

The real turnout numbers

Wisconsin had more than 3.6 million registered voters heading into Election Day, and more than 3.2 million Wisconsinites voted in the presidential race.

But those aren’t the numbers used to calculate turnout here.

For starters, Wisconsin allows same-day voter registration, so that number of registered voters goes up throughout the day. In 2016, for example, 12.7% of voters registered on Election Day, according to the Wisconsin Elections Commission.

Even more important, registered voters is the wrong figure entirely for calculating turnout. Voter turnout in a same-day registration state is based on the percentage of eligible voters who cast a ballot.

So when you divide the number of votes cast in Wisconsin — 3,278,963 as of Nov. 5 — by the voting-age population in Wisconsin (4,536,293 as of 2019, according to the elections commission), you get a turnout rate of 72.3%

 

Further reading on the topic: Politifact, AP, Wisconsin Public Radio.

Edited by Doug B
updated
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Sneegor said:

This is from pre-dawn Thursday morning when Pennsylvania's current vote count was quite a ways from being known. The quoted law professor's opinion depends upon a specific speculative scenario: That Biden's victory in the state absolutely relies on the post-Election-Day mail-in votes.

This is now known not to be the case -- Biden is far enough ahead now that even if all of the Nov 4-6 arrivals were cast for Trump, Biden would still be ahead. Accordingly, media outlets called Pennsylvania for Biden earlier today.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Max Power said:

I think the 3am massive dump of Biden votes was suspect and worth looking in to.

Any large move in favor of one candidate or the other is absolutely looked into on the spot by one party's or the other's ballot observers. A big dump suspiciously heavily in favor of one candidate in a swing state gets challenged immediately within the ballot-count vetting process -- Republican observers don't have to take anyone's word for it. They get to spot-check the big-dump ballots, or go through them individually by hand. None of this requires a court order or anyone from up on high making a call -- such checking of results is well within their rights as observers and is a legitimate part of the vote-counting process.

Something instructive happened in Michigan, when a reported count was erroneously inflated by a factor of 10. The error was noticed quickly by observers from both parties, and the state rectified the figure in short order.

 

Edited by Doug B
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Max Power said:

It's not as much the time as it was that dump was 96-100% Biden votes depending on the source which is a statistical improbability.

Also 89% of Wisconsin voters voted. Another statistical improbability. 

This is the stuff that bothers me.  Trump supporters have been repeating these same things for days, even though they've repeatedly been proven untrue.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

This is the stuff that bothers me.  Trump supporters have been repeating these same things for days, even though they've repeatedly been proven untrue.

 Trump beat Clinton in 2016 in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Trump won those states by 0.2, 0.7 and 0.8 percentage points, respectively — and by 10,704, 46,765 and 22,177 votes. 

But since Trump won there was no fraud. Now that Trump has lost and continues to lose states by narrow margins, there must be fraud. 

Just got to shake your head.

  • Like 7
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Moonlight said:

 Trump beat Clinton in 2016 in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Trump won those states by 0.2, 0.7 and 0.8 percentage points, respectively — and by 10,704, 46,765 and 22,177 votes. 

But since Trump won there was no fraud. Now that Trump has lost and continues to lose states by narrow margins, there must be fraud. 

Just got to shake your head.

It works the other way around as well.

The Democrats claimed for the last 4 years that the Russians hacked the 2016 election. Are we now to believe that no one else was capable of hacking the 2020 election? If the Russians could do it, why couldn't a Democrat sponsored entity do it? Soros and Bloomberg certainly have the financial resources to back such an effort. And I'm not saying they did anything of the sort. But if one is to believe it was possible 4 years ago, you need to believe it is possible this year.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, KingPrawn said:

It works the other way around as well.

The Democrats claimed for the last 4 years that the Russians hacked the 2016 election. Are we now to believe that no one else was capable of hacking the 2020 election? If the Russians could do it, why couldn't a Democrat sponsored entity do it? Soros and Bloomberg certainly have the financial resources to back such an effort. And I'm not saying they did anything of the sort. But if one is to believe it was possible 4 years ago, you need to believe it is possible this year.

 

All that is certainly “possible”. Just as it’s “possible” that the GOP did this time as well but just came up short.  Any thing is “possible”.  Luckily for all of us none of it is likely.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, KingPrawn said:

It works the other way around as well.

The Democrats claimed for the last 4 years that the Russians hacked the 2016 election. Are we now to believe that no one else was capable of hacking the 2020 election? If the Russians could do it, why couldn't a Democrat sponsored entity do it? Soros and Bloomberg certainly have the financial resources to back such an effort. And I'm not saying they did anything of the sort. But if one is to believe it was possible 4 years ago, you need to believe it is possible this year.

 

I haven't seen anything where Ds thought Russia hacked the election.  I know they said Russia used disimformation and social media to influence the election but I never seen anything where they claimed they changed votes.  Can you link to some of the stories on this? 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, KingPrawn said:

It works the other way around as well.

The Democrats claimed for the last 4 years that the Russians hacked the 2016 election. Are we now to believe that no one else was capable of hacking the 2020 election? If the Russians could do it, why couldn't a Democrat sponsored entity do it? Soros and Bloomberg certainly have the financial resources to back such an effort. And I'm not saying they did anything of the sort. But if one is to believe it was possible 4 years ago, you need to believe it is possible this year.

 

No, it wasn't claimed that the Russians hacked the 2016 election.  That is simply a falsehood.

First of all, it was that they interfered with the 2016 election.  There's a big difference.  They did this with misinformation and guided propaganda.  It's not acceptable for foreign entities to do so.

Second of all, it's not a claim.  It was verified by US Intelligence.  The "claim" was that part of that interference was in partnership with members of the Trump campaign in order to help get him elected.  That was not disproven.

  • Like 3
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, KingPrawn said:

It works the other way around as well.

The Democrats claimed for the last 4 years that the Russians hacked the 2016 election. Are we now to believe that no one else was capable of hacking the 2020 election? If the Russians could do it, why couldn't a Democrat sponsored entity do it? Soros and Bloomberg certainly have the financial resources to back such an effort. And I'm not saying they did anything of the sort. But if one is to believe it was possible 4 years ago, you need to believe it is possible this year.

 

Apples to oranges. Talking about media influence as opposed to voter fraud. Doesn't apply.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, KingPrawn said:

It works the other way around as well.

The Democrats claimed for the last 4 years that the Russians hacked the 2016 election. Are we now to believe that no one else was capable of hacking the 2020 election? If the Russians could do it, why couldn't a Democrat sponsored entity do it? Soros and Bloomberg certainly have the financial resources to back such an effort. And I'm not saying they did anything of the sort. But if one is to believe it was possible 4 years ago, you need to believe it is possible this year.

 

I have never heard any Democrat say Russians hacked the 2016 election and cussed wide spread voter fraud. Where have you read this?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

congrats to Biden & 90% of the guys & gals in here.  Trump was against the wall with the covid thing whether or not he did or not do enough.  economy went to hell because of covid.  regardless you got the change you wanted & hopefully America stays great.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, shadrap said:

congrats to Biden & 90% of the guys & gals in here.  Trump was against the wall with the covid thing whether or not he did or not do enough.  economy went to hell because of covid.  regardless you got the change you wanted & hopefully America stays great.

Hopefully America stays good

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shadrap said:

congrats to Biden & 90% of the guys & gals in here.  Trump was against the wall with the covid thing whether or not he did or not do enough.  economy went to hell because of covid.  regardless you got the change you wanted & hopefully America stays great.

Thank you, Shadrap. Hopefully, I can be so gracious in a similar situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Doug B said:

Theredelephants.com link Sneegor posted is inaccurate regarding Wisconsin voter turnout:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/05/fact-check-wisconsin-voter-turnout-line-past-elections/6176028002/

 

  

7 hours ago, Doug B said:
8 hours ago, Sneegor said:

This is from pre-dawn Thursday morning when Pennsylvania's current vote count was quite a ways from being known. The quoted law professor's opinion depends upon a specific speculative scenario: That Biden's victory in the state absolutely relies on the post-Election-Day mail-in votes.

This is now known not to be the case -- Biden is far enough ahead now that even if all of the Nov 4-6 arrivals were cast for Trump, Biden would still be ahead. Accordingly, media outlets called Pennsylvania for Biden earlier today.

:goodposting:

Thanks for investing the time to shoot down shoddy reporting with some cold hard facts. I know it probably won't stop the rumors and lies, but it helps.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Max Power said:

Also 89% of Wisconsin voters voted. Another statistical improbability. 

For WI it's really not, but it's misleading.  My village was 93% and a few rural townships in my surrounding area were even higher.  The % of voter turnout is based on the registration logs that are printed prior to the election.  That's the number of total registered voters count.  Any new voter registrations after that date - like all the election day registrations and there were a lot of them - don't get included in that count.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Max Power said:

It's not as much the time as it was that dump was 96-100% Biden votes depending on the source which is a statistical improbability.

Also 89% of Wisconsin voters voted. Another statistical improbability. 

What are you talking about?

Here are the results 2016 vs 2020:

2016

Trump: 1,409,467 (47.9%)

Clinton: 1,382,210 (46.9%)

Other: 152,942 (5.2%)

2020

Trump: 1,610,030 (48.9%)

Biden: 1,630,570 (49.6)

Other: 48,874 (1.6%) 

There were fewer 3rd party votes this year and voter turnout was up, which is true nationally. So are you implying that "they" also boosted Trump's numbers in this statistical improbability because Trump gained over 200K votes over 2016. 

Edited by TheMagus
fewer vs less - fall into the habit every time
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, KingPrawn said:

It works the other way around as well.

The Democrats claimed for the last 4 years that the Russians hacked the 2016 election. Are we now to believe that no one else was capable of hacking the 2020 election? If the Russians could do it, why couldn't a Democrat sponsored entity do it? Soros and Bloomberg certainly have the financial resources to back such an effort. And I'm not saying they did anything of the sort. But if one is to believe it was possible 4 years ago, you need to believe it is possible this year.

 

1. No one said this

2. Of course the same thing that did happen in 2016 could happen in 2020 as this administration did nothing to combat it

3. The hacking that did occur, of the dnc servers, was not coordinated with team Trump, but the release of that information allegedly was coordinated through roger stone and Wikileaks. Stone was convicted  of witness tampering and lying to investigators, and his sentence was commuted.Link

4. No one even argues when people claim “muh Russia” hoax because there is no point. Plenty of evidence to show they knew the email dumps were coming. Maybe that’s not illegal, I don’t know, but they knew, and it’s dirty tricks if nothing else. 
I’ll add, the Trump tower meeting about “adoptions” is the quid pro quo here- if in his lame duck term Trump tries to take the teeth out of the Magnisky act (which has to do with adoptions, and also the ability to seize assets in the US bought with laundered money) then we will know for sure. They had the info, talked about magnisky act, and the info was dumped. If this doesn’t happen, I’ll be a little more convinced that they were just stooges that benefitted from some lucky timing of bad information about his opponent that he happened to predict in a campaign speech. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TheMagus said:

Sorry, I saw after I posted that someone also covered the same day voter registration phenomenon so the denominator is not a constant of registered voters. 

I'm also wondering @Max Power are you a statistician to be declaring things statistically improbable?

No, but beef explained it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Rich. Seriously. 

I have asked before, but how is a national election rigged?  Who is in charge?  How does it work?  Surely there is a line of communication that involve 100's of people.  Why just rig the presidential race and not all of them?  Come on man stop this crap

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, pantherclub said:

I have asked before, but how is a national election rigged?  Who is in charge?  How does it work?  Surely there is a line of communication that involve 100's of people.  Why just rig the presidential race and not all of them?  Come on man stop this crap

And the alleged rigging goes AGAINST the guy in charge of the country (President)? The guy who appointed the head of the USPS?

I don't get it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kristi Noem stepping up 

 

Governor Kristi Noem

@govkristinoem

DC Elites are eager to return to "business as usual.” The 70 million Americans who voted for @realDonaldTrump are not moving on just because the media says so. Serious election integrity concerns (read Alito’s opinion) in several states that the media should be investigating.

Mitt Romney

@MittRomney

Ann and I extend our congratulations to President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris. We know both of them as people of good will and admirable character. We pray that God may bless them in the days and years ahead

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • knowledge dropper changed the title to TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...